The Unwinnable Game: Understanding the Double-Bind in Family Scapegoating Abuse (FSA)

Recognizing the family 'game' (that's not so fun to 'play'...)

Photo by laura adai on Unsplash

By Rebecca C. Mandeville, LMFT, CCTP

This is a public post. I love hearing from you in the comments, but please do be mindful that your comments are public. Paid community members may discuss this post’s topic in our private, paywall-protected chat space here: https://open.substack.com/chat/posts/a1b9ba30-6ae0-424b-b624-e183e378aeae

The Double Binds Inherent In FSA

For the adult survivor of Family Scapegoating Abuse (FSA), there is a crushing emotional reality that defines their experience: The feeling of being trapped—where no choice is the right choice and there is seemingly no way out of the chronic mental and emotional pain associated with being in the ‘family scapegoat’ role.

This paralyzing sensation has a name in Family Systems theory: The double-bind. Though initially introduced by anthropologist Gregory Bateson and the Palo Alto Group in the 1950s to study communication patterns in families with a member diagnosed with schizophrenia, its framework provides a chillingly accurate lens through which to view the mechanisms that keep the FSA survivor perpetually ensnared.

A double-bind is not just a mixed message; it’s a communication paradox designed to be inescapable. It requires three critical elements:

1. A primary injunction (an explicit command, e.g., “Do this”).

2. A secondary injunction that contradicts the first (often unspoken, emotional, or non-verbal, e.g., “If you do that, you are bad”).

3. A requirement that the recipient cannot comment on the contradiction or escape the relationship / situation.

In families that scapegoat, this paradox serves as the scapegoat’s psycho-emotional cage.

---

The Mechanics of the FSA Double-Bind

The family system doesn’t explicitly announce to the scapegoat target, “We are setting a trap for you.” Instead, the conflicting demands are woven into the very fabric of daily interactions.

Below are two of the most common and damaging double-binds experienced by the scapegoated child victim or adult survivor, as revealed by my original research on the devastating systemic phenomenon I named ‘Family Scapegoating Abuse’, or FSA (I’ll address the core FSA double bind later in this article):

A. The “Be Competent, But Never Leave Us” Bind

This bind weaponizes the scapegoat’s drive for health and independence.

• The Message (Primary Injunction): The scapegoat is often explicitly or implicitly pushed toward success, achievement, or being the “responsible one”. They may simultaneously be in the “nurturer” or “caretaker” role in their family, which is often true of the eldest sibling (but not always), and can also be true for the ‘Empath child’, as discussed in my introductory book on FSA, Rejected, Shamed, and Blamed. They may be told, “You are smart, you need to go to college and make a success of yourself.” This message appears supportive and positive — on the surface.

• The Counter-Message (Secondary Injunction): The moment the scapegoated adult child takes a meaningful step toward genuine independence—reaching a goal, moving out, getting married, or advancing a career—it is met with guilt, manufactured crisis, or subtle sabotage. The family may suddenly express profound distress, illnesses flair up (with the assumption that the scapegoated family member will “come back to help,”) or financial “emergencies” are suddenly prevalent, all designed to pull the scapegoat back into the fold.

• The Result: Damned if you succeed, damned if you fail. If the FSA survivor succeeds in pursuing their own goals while simultaneously individuating from their enmeshed family system, they are labeled ‘selfish’ for abandoning needy family members (they may also be labeled a ‘narcissist’ by disappointed family members). If they fail by not meeting their goals or fulfilling their potential (or retreat to avoid the guilt of individuating or being more successful than others in their family), they confirm the family’s negative label that they are a “loser,” “stupid,” a “screw-up,” or “not trying hard enough.”

B. The “Fix Us, But Don’t Change Anything” Bind

This bind places the responsibility for the entire family’s stability directly onto the scapegoat’s shoulders.

• The Message (Primary Injunction): The scapegoat is designated as the “problem” and, by extension, is implicitly tasked with fixing the family’s underlying dysfunction. They are told, “If you were just less sensitive/defiant/stressed/difficult/needy (etc.), the family would be peaceful.” The primary command is: Change yourself, and everyone in the family will be well.

• The Counter-Message (Secondary Injunction): Any attempt by the scapegoat to point out the actual source of the family system’s overt or covert distress—the parental conflict, the addiction, the abuse, the bullying, the lack of boundaries—is met with violent rejection, pathologizing, or punishment. They are told, “You are imagining things/overreacting/too dramatic/causing trouble.” Or, “You’re crazy!” or “You’re a liar!” Or how about this one, mentioned recently by a subscriber: “We don’t have a problem. The common denominator is YOU!” (I’ll get a full post out about this soon). And don’t think that developing healthy communication skills and boundaries will help the FSA survivor. I remember trying out my new, healthy communication skills at a family reunion a few decades ago, and I was promptly told to “Stop talking like a therapist!” (Learn more about why developing healthy boundaries typically make scapegoating worse).

• The Result: Damned if you try to change the system, damned if you do nothing. If the scapegoated family member tries to change the dysfunctional or narcissistic family system they find themselves in by exposing the truth, they are punished for being disruptive and confirmed as the “troublemaker.” If they do nothing and simply manage their own psycho-emotional pain, they are still seen as the uncooperative “problem” preventing family harmony.

---

The Systems Impact: Immobility and Psychological Damage

The double-bind is not a parenting oversight; it is a crucial mechanism for maintaining family homeostasis. This paradox keeps the scapegoat emotionally paralyzed and physically and emotionally “stuck” in their role, unable to threaten the family’s dysfunctional status quo. If the scapegoat broke free of this dynamic, the family is in danger of having to confront the true sources of their individual and systemic imbalance.

The long-term psychological damage of being ensnared in this way can be devastating to the FSA child victim or adult survivor and can result in:

• Cognitive Dissonance: The brain struggles to reconcile two equally compelling, yet contradictory, realities. When reality is chronically distorted and ‘split’, it is incredibly difficult for the FSA child victim or adult survivor to trust their own perceptions or emotional responses.

• Profound Feelings of Confusion and Helplessness: The repeated experience of the unwinnable game leads to a deeply ingrained sense of learned helplessness, where the survivor believes that no matter what they choose, the outcome will be negative.

---

Acknowledging the Core FSA Double Bind

The power of the double-bind rests entirely on the recipient being unable to acknowledge the contradiction they are faced with. The core double bind in families that scapegoat one of their own is a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” paradox that is psychologically damaging because it prevents the scapegoated individual from ever being able to successfully resolve the conflict or please the family.

In the context of family scapegoating, the core double bind often manifests as:

1. Primary Demand (Overt): The family presents an image of being loving, functional, or wanting the individual to be “better,” “happier,” or “normal.” The (unspoken) message is often: “Be a well-adjusted, independent, and contributing member of this family. We want this for you.”

2. Secondary Demand (Covert/Implicit): The family’s underlying, dysfunctional need is for the scapegoat to continue serving as the “problem” who carries all the family’s unacknowledged issues (individual and systemic guilt, shame, anger, trauma — including intergenerational trauma — etc.). The hidden message is: “Remain the defective, sick, or difficult one so we can maintain our false harmony and avoid looking at our own dysfunction.”

3. No-Win/No-Escape:

   • If the scapegoat complies with the Primary Demand (e.g., becomes successful, happy, and well-adjusted), they threaten the family’s equilibrium by removing the family system’s necessary “problem.” This results in punishment (increased criticism, isolation, or sabotage) so as to pull them back into the role.

   • If the scapegoat complies with the Secondary Demand (e.g., acts out, fails, or shows distress), they fulfill the family’s need for a problem but are punished for being “the problem” they were subtly commanded to be (I saw this often when running the family programs at addiction treatment clinics).

The scapegoated individual is therefore trapped: Any move toward genuine health and independence is viewed as an attack on the family system, yet any display of the “sickness” they are blamed for is harshly criticized, condemned, and judged.

Game Over

The key to escape for the FSA survivor is to both realize and ‘radically accept’ that this particular family system “game” is unwinnable because the rules are rigged. The family is demanding a mathematical impossibility: “Be who we need you to be, not who you really are, because who you really are threatens what we need (or prefer) to believe about ourselves and this family.”

The only way to truly break the double-bind is to develop a more expansive awareness regarding family systems dynamics, as well as employing meta-communication so as to step outside the trap to comment on the nature of the communication itself.

This looks like:

• Naming the Core Double Bind - Even if only to yourself: Explicitly identifying the contradiction (e.g., “They are telling me they want me to be successful, but every time I achieve something, they create a crisis to pull me back into their dysfunction and/or find a way to ‘reject, shame, and blame’ me again. I see the contradiction. I see the game.”)

• Choosing Self-Validation: Recognizing that the family’s demands are impossible and prioritizing your own well-being over their unreasonable and irrational behaviors and/or requests.

• Distance: Creating physical and/or emotional distance to remove yourself from the constant, high-pressure communication (both verbal and non-verbal) cycle.

Reframing the Double Bind - Focusing on Internal Agency

Some FSA survivors are still in contact with scapegoating family members and do not feel they can disconnect from those who abuse them at this time. Since immediate external change may genuinely not be possible, the most powerful shift you can make is internal—moving from the sense of being a victim of circumstance to becoming an active agent within your constraints.

• Shift from “Why Me?” to “What Now?”: The question “Why does my family treat me this way?” keeps you fixed on the past and external forces. The question, “What small, concrete choice can I make right now to protect my inner peace?“ is a question of agency and can help shift your sense of being forever trapped in family-generated dysfunctional double binds.

• Acknowledge and Separate: When the scapegoating, gaslighting or projection happens, and/or you feel you’re drowning in the toxic ‘scapegoat narrative’ your family promotes inside and outside of the family, silently acknowledge: “This is the illness of the family system talking. This is their shadow. This is familiar, but it is not my truth.“ The goal isn’t to change those who cannot see you for who you actually are, but to immediately disconnect your emotional core from their distortion field. This is an act of emotional sovereignty.

• The Power of Tiny Wins (or ‘Small Gains’): Focus on small, deliberate actions that nourish you, proving to yourself that you still have control over your personal space and time, even if you cannot limit or end contact with scapegoating family members just yet.

You do not have to win the game, because the game is designed for you to lose. Your only path to freedom is to stop playing and focus on creating a life that reflects who you most truly are.

To learn more about Family Systems, family homeostasis, and the insidious phenomenon I named ‘Family Scapegoating Abuse’ (FSA), visit my FSA Education website and/or read my introductory book on FSA, Rejected, Shamed, and Blamed.